🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the Trump administration latest initiative to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's close connection with Vice President Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic VP at the forefront of President Trump's latest push to settle the conflict.

Before his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or statesman, and his early efforts to promote the deal to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

His strong ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a personal bond, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Role in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial trip to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is again resisting demands from the US to agree to a quick settlement that local officials have called a surrender.

After a chaotic first year in power, international actions in the White House are said to be shaped by a handful of Trump's key aides, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the latest plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, alongside the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the ceasefire plan the White House is developing either misinterprets the framework or misrepresents some critical reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Initial Efforts and EU Responses

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also attempting to restore ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were irritated by his early speeches, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published ceasefire proposal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a ceasefire plan that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to both sides, and stop the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by unsuccessful diplomats or politicians living in a dream world,” he continued. “It could be made by intelligent people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his staff with obtaining a signature on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that given by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the White House to more firm standing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that traveled to Geneva this past weekend to meet with Ukrainian leaders to help moderate the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

But, his first response to the deal was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complex and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive discussion of substantive and realistic ideas,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting ceasefire will necessitate both sides to consent to challenging but necessary compromises. That is why we are and will persist to develop a list of possible ideas for resolving this conflict drawing from input from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to explain that the deal was just a initial offer from the Russians and not an plan pushed by the administration.

“Rubio did make a call to us this afternoon and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was delivered to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he subsequently stated. “The framework is presented as a strong framework for ongoing discussions. The proposal is derived from feedback from the Moscow. However, it is additionally based on previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”